Jobs to a persons personalityI remember last Saturday evening, while listening to a radio program, someone talked about a person should find a job best suited to their personality. First inclination I had was yeah, that' s a fine slogan to say, but the American job market is no longer about abundance and availability to suit each different person' s altruism. It' s a job market based solely on availability and the choice is two-fold, work and earn money or not. Of course he was on to peddle some stupid book he wrote about it, but still. Not every job that bests suits a person is available, sometimes working a job that' s not satisfying, or in the least best suited to a personality is the only one that' s available. Meaning only a particular employer offering a particular job is willing to do so. My family wants me to look for security jobs. Why? Because of the six ( +/- ) years experience I had. I have to tell them and employers that I hated the job not for what it was, but what it wasn' t. I only worked it for the money and being under the assumption that I would be moving on in a relative period of time far less than what I ended up working - 6 years. I guess some assumptions are what they are. You can' t avoid them with family or prospective employers. Even though I hate it. From my perspective, six years didn' t mean I liked it or wanted it to be my end all, be all livelihood. Six years only meant that I didn' t get fired for incompetence, and I stayed for the money. So how much attention should be spent on that, given today' s post 9/11 job market? I say not much if any, until things get exponentially better. Getting a job that fits your personality is not a slogan but just plain common sense; for example, a person who is very outgoing is certainly not going to fit very well in a solo position where they have no contact with anyone. For those who don' t have a clue, they can take a multitude of different tests at a local college to see where they would fit in as far as careers. Certainly the job market is not like it used to be a few years ago. However, I would say if a person is single, they can go anywhere to where the jobs are that they want. It' s your life, not your family' s. I moved from one part of the state to another about 8 years ago. I had several jobs because I was laid off twice due to restructuring. I didn' t sit idly. I took temporary positions to get extra money and experience and kept applying for other positions. I networked like crazy and kept in touch with the local agencies who had helped me before. That is how I was able to stay employed except for a couple of weeks. I am a positive thinker and I believe you can find whatever it is that you want if you want it bad enough. With the "want" you have to do the work to go after it and get it, though. Whining and bad mouthing everything doesn' t produce positive results. I' ve had jobs that didn' t quite fit my personality. That didn' t mean I didn' t do them to the best of my ability. However, I also realized that the job was not permanent and always kept looking for opportunities. You just learn from the experience and use it make the next job even better. I work in the legal field full-time and I' m a writer on the side. That fits my personality perfectly right now. I' d like to get Hugh Hefner' s job, I think it suits me perfectly! I don' t think I' ll give up my day job in expectation. How is the job market different since 9/11? I haven' t noticed a difference. That' s a thought. I do rub people the wrong way at times, that' s a qualification for Imus' job. Are there any babes involved? I don' t think I can handle the hours that go with his job. Myself, I don' t even like the idea that it gets to be 6:00 twice a day. What makes you think I haven' t applied to a variable amount of positions beyond the borders of my state? Certainly I have. My home state is Massachusetts. I' ve applied to job offers in New Hampshire, where I' m not far from given my location near the border. Connecticut, Rhode Island, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Tennessee, Kansas, California, Virginia ( where my dead father is from ) and Texas, where I' ve hoped to garner a personal deal with one tech company to produce my own product. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the practice of recruitment. There are some people who employers seek out. They offer paid travel to and from their location for interviews, and assuming one is hired, they even go so far as to invest money by setting up a nice apartment, maybe a company vehicle, other sorted perks. It' s too bad no one' s ever offered that to me. It' s also too bad you never bothered to even ask that question aside from all the recycled and regurgitated criticism. You' re absolutely right though, why would you even think to ask it since it' s obvious that answer wouldn' t be a positive one regardless. But still, if this is a communique worth it' s time, you could do yourself the favor of asking better questions you supposedly want responses to - and not fireballs which I' m all to used to hurling. You are right many organizations offer to pay for travel for interviews. They also offer relocation for the right candidate. In my time I have traveled for interviews many times and had employers travel to me several times as well. I have also had company paid relocations several times (5) and been on company paid expatriate packages a few times. The issue is that you have to have skills that a company needs for this to happen. I have never seen a company pay for "unskilled" labor which is available in their own market. You have to have skills that they cannot get in their local market. Alternatively you have to already be within an organization and valued by them; then you could apply for internal postings. They might value your contributions enough to pay for your relocation to another part of the company and country. In your case, applying for jobs outside of your local market will likely result in you paying for travel to interviews and paying for your own relocation. Be prepared for that. You like to go out of your way again labeling me unskilled. Explain something to me, which you have dodged time and again. The nature of employers hiring illegal aliens? Now it' s true, that some people be they from Mexico, or the Latin American Region as a whole, be they Russian defectors, Israeli nationals, Iraqi refugees, or somewhere throughout Asia and Europe people with the necessary skills travel great distances to work ( first ) and live ( location / lifestyle ) on the proverbial company dime - for quite some time in most cases. Having said all that, what excuses are there in hiring low rent workers to perform work people like me could do, no problem if they just chose to upgrade the pay by tacking another multiple of ten ( 10 ) next to a salary rate like $25 or 35 an hour? When some anti-illegal immigration laws and law enforcement initiatives reach implementation, employers will systematically be sent to prison for encouraging criminal behavior. I can speak and understand English, I can read, assemble, and upgrade technical equipment, maybe with some time even industrial equipment as well. Some would call it broadening my skill set, if only I had a motivation to do so. But alas, people like me go ignored while employers make up their own excuses to do what is clearly wrong. Unskilled vs Skilled is a specific labor reference that has nothing to do with you personally but has to do with the way in which employers "label". In general "skilled" means that you are either university educated in a specific area of expertise or alternatively you are specifically certified in a craft (draftsman, plumber, etc). "Unskilled" means that you are not university educated or certified in a craft. This does not mean that you personally do not have skills or expertise only that your skills or expertise are not readily recognized by employers within their categories. Try not to be so sensitive. As to the issue of illegal aliens. You have not ever asked this question but you could read other forums to see the answer that I and others have given regarding this issue. I personally believe that any employer who knowingly hires illegal aliens to perform any work should be fined heavily the first time; should be jailed and fined the second time; and should lose their business, jailed and fined heavily the final time. I think any property owner who rents to an illegal alien should be fined heavily the first time; should be jailed and fined heavily the second time; and should lose their property, be jailed and fined heavily the third time. I believe strongly that anyone who enables illegal aliens should be face heavy consequences. Illegal aliens come to the US because it is easy to live and work here. We won't be able to stop this until we we make it more difficult and this can only be done by stopping the enablers. We also need to limit H1B's. It is untrue that we don't have enough people in this country to fill the demand for technology workers in this country. Even if it were true it is our responsibility to ensure that American citizens are provided opportunity to gain the skills necessary to become employable rather than simply importing workers in to work at lower salaries. Microsoft, IBM, and all the other companies applying for and being granted huge numbers of unnecessary H1B's for technology workers are doing a grave disservice to the US worker and ultimately to the US economy. Finally, the American worker has to become more realistic regarding their value in the marketplace. There is a disparity in what some American workers earn and what their contribution is to organization. This needs to shift to obtain parity on both sides. Both skilled and unskilled (used as described above) workers need to earn appropriate salaries and benefits that represent contributions and value. No a CEO should not be earning 500% more than the lowest paid employee unless his contribution is legitimately and measurably that much greater. No the janitor or the unarmed security guard sitting at the front desk should not be earning $25 per hour, his contribution is simply not that great, especially when compared the fact that many teachers in this country earn less. The problem with employers and that label " unskilled " however you choose to define it for the purposes of an occupational discussion - render people like me in the disregard category. Wether you' re willing to acknowledge that or not, it is and continues to happen. Aside from the illegal immigration nonsense, that still is a viable point I make in my arguments. _______________________________________________________________________________ If instead of your perpetual lame and empty criticism, why not ask me this : Would you consider returning to school to get your certification and / or diploma should an employer choose to hire you using that as a continuing condition for maintaining employment? That answer would be met with a small, non-descriptive yes. | |
|
Career Tips
|